Re: Which database part 2 - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

From scott.marlowe
Subject Re: Which database part 2
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.33.0306161239480.2361-100000@css120.ihs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Which database part 2  (Kaarel <kaarel@future.ee>)
List pgsql-advocacy
On Fri, 13 Jun 2003, Kaarel wrote:

> I have been reading a little documentation and mail-lists from both
> sides. I noticed one interesting thing about MySQL: there are different
> table types with different properties. Why doesn't PostgreSQL have
> differently oriented/optimized table types? I found particularly
> intresting the heap table type which is being stored entirely in memory
> not on disk drive.

any points I would have had have been addressed by other folks except for
one.

In MySQL if you define one table of MyISAM (non-transactable) and one of
innodb (transactable) and you do this:

begin;
update myisamtable set field='value' where id=2;
update innodbtable set field='value' where id=2;
rollback;

you now have one table that updated and one that didn't.

I don't consider that a feature.


pgsql-advocacy by date:

Previous
From: "scott.marlowe"
Date:
Subject: Re: Which database part 2
Next
From: "scott.marlowe"
Date:
Subject: Re: Which database part 2